Download Order No-16 - Delhi Medical Council

DMC/14/2/Comp. 16/2002/
May 14, 2002
Ms. Kamni Chopra
D/o. Shri Dharam Pal Chopra
61/61, Old Rajinder Nagar,
New Delhi – 110 060
Sub: Complaint of Ms. Kamni Chopra against Dr. D.S. Rana & Dr. Pradeep Mathur
The Delhi Medical Council has examined the complaint of Ms. Kamni Chopra against Dr. D.S.
Rana and Dr. Pradeep Mathur alleging medical negligence in the treatment given to her father, Late
Dharam Pal Chopra. The Council examined the complainant, Dr. D.S. Rana, Dr. Pradeep Mathur,
documents on record and observed that Dr. Mathur was treating the complainant’s father for the last
20 years and had on a number of occasions explained the seriousness of diseases with which Late
Dharam Pal Chopra was suffering. Dr. Mathur stated that he had advised dialysis 3 years earlier also
which relatives had declined. This time Late Dharam Pal Chopra was admitted in Kolmet Hospital on
13.4.2001 in a critical condition and was suffering from :1.
2.
3.
4.
Diabetes mellitus
Diabetic rephropathy with advanced renal failure
Cardiomyopathy (Left ventricular ejection fraction 22%) with chronic congestive cardiac failure
Gross fluid overload due to chronic renal failure, chronic congestive cardiac Failure and
hypoalbuminemia
5. Severe malnutrition with hypoprotenemia
6. Encephalopathy (because of uremia and possible sepsis)
7. Bed sores.
Ms. Kamni Chopra admitted that seeing the results of Peritoneal Dialysis in the neighbouring
patient in the hospital, relatives were encouraged to get Peritoneal Dialysis done for Late Dharam Pal
Chopra. Dr. Mathur had advised that Dialysis could be done but it can yield limited response. The
complainant has alleged that there was a delay in peritoneal dialysis and restoring Peritoneal Dialysis
canula which had come out. On examination of records, it was found that the consent for peritoneal
dialysis was given by Nitika Chopra, Daughter-in-law of Late Dharam Pal Chopra at 4.00 PM on 13th
May, 2001 and it was further observed that peritoneal dialysis was started by Dr. D.S. Rana on 13th
May itself. Therefore, the Council finds that there was no delay in starting peritoneal dialysis.
The Council further observed that Peritoneal Dialysis canula had come out and the Nephrologist
Dr. D.S. Rana had already pointed out in his statement that the PD canula had accidentally got
displaced during the change of bed-sheet and he had as such ordered for the removal of the canula as
he felt that the part of the negative balance had already been achieved. Since there was no delay in
starting the peritoneal dialysis after the consent was taken and a satisfactory scientific explanation for
non-restoration of canula was given by Dr. D.S. Rana, it is the decision of the Delhi Medical Council
that Dr. Pradeep Mathur and Dr. D.S. Rana were not negligent in the treatment administered by them
to Late Dharam Pal Chopra and are exonerated.
(Dr. S.K. Khattri)
Registrar & Secretary
Copy to :
1)
Dr. D. S. Rana, R-770, New Rajender Nagar, New Delhi – 110060.
2)
Dr. Pradeep Mathur, Kolmet Hospital, New Delhi.
(Dr. S.K. Khattri)
Registrar & Secretary